Cover The Vote

Media commentary is so often called media criticism for good reason. There's much to lament in journalism these days. But good coverage shouldn't go unnoticed. And so I say heckuva job to the reporters who've been drawing attention to a range of voting issues that have arisen this fall. There might not be a more important story right now -- and the media have been on top of it.

Publications have dutifully covered accusations of wrongdoing at ACORN and produced timely think pieces -- see Slate's look at the danger of believing in vote fraud. What's heartening, as well, is that the tone of news coverage about long lines for early voting hasn't been overly cheerleaderish -- wow, record turnout! -- but has been somewhat sober. There's plenty of warrented concern about polling places being unprepared on Election Day -- a story that's had legs thus far.

One could argue that the media were caught flat-flooted after the 2000 election debacle, but have learned from their mistakes. As record voter turnout is expected in 2008, reporters, at least, are prepared this time around.

Bull On Parade

Much as MSNBC's Keith Olbermann found his editorial voice attacking right-leaning politicians and their policies, CNN anchor Campbell Brown is making her name calling out campaign leaders and other newsmakers whose comments sound fishy.

Brown isn't relying on hyper-partisan rhetoric. In fact, she's making a painstaking effort to claim neutrality as her network seeks to find a middle ground between MSNBC and Fox News. Her YouTubular-rant directed at Sarah Palin's handlers for shielding her from the media? More of a show of solidarity with spurned reporters than anything else.

In Brown's "Cutting Through the Bull" segment that points out overstatements and debunks campaign ads, it's a Democratic tit for a Republican tat. It's setting the record straight on John McCain's role in the savings and loan scandal and explaining Barack Obama's relationship with violent antiwar protester William Ayers.

Brown's show is fairing well in CNN's 8 p.m. slot. According to The New York Times, the program drew an average of 826,000 viewers a night from March 10 through Sept. 28.

There's nothing wrong with a little fact checking on cable news. Pointing out absurdity has become a nightly ritual on The Daily Show. But Brown and CNN reporters don't use Jon Stewart's brand of satire -- or any humor for that matter. And therein lies the potential problem.

By rehashing the smear campaign of the day in such a serious setting, CNN runs the risk of perpetuating falsehoods. As The Washington Post reported last year:

"The conventional response to myths and urban legends is to counter bad information with accurate information. But the new psychological studies show that denials and clarifications, for all their intuitive appeal, can paradoxically contribute to the resiliency of popular myths."

It's not as if Brown invented the "fact checker" feature (newspapers have long run such columns around election season) or broke new ground by responding to puzzling sound bites. It's just that by adopting the "no bull" theme for her show, she is promising evenhanded public interest journalism in a format that rewards partisanship and quick-hitting reports.

Only time will tell if Brown's show has enough meat.

Debate Wrap

Spent most of VP debate night watching live tapings of "Hardball" (got a brief cameo on TV and the fiancee almost got interviewed by Chris Matthews), and blogging for the St. Louis Beacon on student reaction to Sarah Palin and Joe Biden.

As I had predicted, the event ended up being more theater than news. It was odd hearing pundits more or less agree that the night was a push. No major flubs for Palin; a solid performance from Biden. C'mon, media elites, can't we find anyone to take a contrarian point of view?

Moderator Gwen Ifill put to rest any concern about her ability to be a fair referee -- 90 percent of undecided voters polled at the Washington U. law school said they thought Ifill was evenhanded in her questioning. That same group, for the record, found Palin to be likeable but not substantive. Biden got generally high marks.

It was noteworthy, too, that MSNBC was the only station to have a real presence on campus (or at least the part of campus where those without press passes could wander.) Hardball had several tapings from the quad; CNN and FOX were nowhere to be found. That's curious, given the build up to this debate.

In fact, I saw more of Matthews and John Oliver from The Daily Show than reporters from the major networks and newspapers combined. Guess that's a matter of those programs playing to their base.

Big Pundits on Campus: 24 hours til Palin v. Biden

Took a stroll through the Wash U campus on a nice fall Wednesday. The media frenzy hadn't yet begun but it was Super Tuesday for the tech guys, truck drivers and producers. I'll have plenty to say tomorrow night about the big show, but for now I'll let the pictures tell the story.


Setting up the MSNBC set, a.k.a. making sure Chris Matthews looks pretty.

If this doesn't get you pumped about the campaign season
I don't know what will.

Now we're talking. The best political love bus on television.

In case you're wondering, the Kappa Sig bros support Obama...

... While the Theta Chi boys are in the tank for McCain

Mmmm. Will the media feast on Palin? Ba da bing.

Division III football players dream of having this kind of
media attention.

Tough choice: Debate watching party or arcade night with
the cute pink dude.

Going green. Something both parties can agree on.

Countdown to Veep Debate -- 3 Questions in Media Coverage

Less than 60 hours 'til debate time. Is it just me or does it feel like there's more buzz about Biden v. Palin than Obama vs. McCain? Wash. U. is starting to resemble a county fair with all the tents and fences and signs. But still no sign of media types.

Before reporters go live from campus, here are three questions about how the press will influence the debate and shape the storylines afterward.

1. How many times will Sarah Palin aides, pundits and anchors utter the phrase "exceeded expectations?" If I was creating a drinking game for Thursday night, it would go something like this: Take a shot for every reference to the GOP veep candidate doing better than predicted. With conservatives saying that Palin is simply out of her league in this election, and YouTube junkies expecting no dearth of must-see Palinisms posted by Friday morning, is it possible that Joe Biden's in a no-win situation?

We've seen this act before. Many television pundits declared that Palin had exceeded expectations in her Republican Convention address. Don't expect the analysis to be much different unless Palin follows Tina Fey's lead and actually does ask to phone a friend.

2. Will moderator Gwen Ifill channel Jim Lehrer and push for candidate interaction? After all, that is the point of a debate, right? After McCain and Obama spent the first 10 minutes fixated on the camera, Lehrer did just about everything possible to get them to look at and talk to each other. They loosened up eventually, with an assist to the PBS anchorman.

Ifill might have a tough task getting Palin and Joe Biden to engage in a true back-and-forth, given that Biden can't really prepare for combat without knowing what Palin thinks about the issues, and that Palin is a rookie debater. But if viewers are to get a real sense of Palin's thought process (and not just canned answers courtesty of top aides), it will be Ifill's prodding that likely produces such impromptu moments.

3. Can reporters keep the debate in context? I'm hopeful. On live TV, it's almost guaranteed that this will be viewed as a momentum-seizing night for the GOP or a major flop for the Dems. Print's often a different story -- and beat writers and bloggers have seen enough of these things to put it all in perspective. In all likelihood, we'll hear some about Palin's ideals and Biden's relaxing Amtrak rides. But this will be more theater than anything else.

Circus Week in St. Louis

The show's coming to town. The media trucks are rolling in, campaign buses not far behind. It's the Wolf Blitzer blitz, Anderson Cooper live from the Arch! Joe Biden's coming -- get your digital recorders ready. Oh, and I heard there's another veep candidate who people are kind of curious to hear.

Yep, it's vice presidential debate week in St. Louis. The big event is Thursday evening at Washington University -- about seven blocks from where I live. Check back for regular updates about the media scene and what it's like to cover those covering the debate.

It's a Vertical World

I can remember the sarcastic comments from some journalism buddies in Washington when word starting spreading about a start-up political publication. Wow, political news! Focusing on the Beltway! What a novel idea!

The market's too crowded, we agreed. Even if top dawgs at the Washington Post were coming to start this venture, how would this Web site plan on beating the Post at its own game?

Two years later, the joke's on us. Politico is a powerhouse of political journalism, shining brightly with strong traditional reporting and insightful blogging. During the political conventions last month, its editors helped set the news media's agenda.

What's to learn from Politico's success story? Web journalism is thriving? It's an election year; timing is everything? People really do care about political minutae? Sure. But that's not seeing the bigger picture.

Politico is an example of what's called a vertical publication. One subject. A targeted audience. In other words, a news organization that's not trying to be everything to everyone. And that might just be the future of journalism.

At newspapers and magazines across the country, resources are spread thin. Institutional knowledge is leaving the newsroom with every buyout or layoff. In-depth reporting suffers. But at vertical publications -- mostly Web sites these days -- reporters have well-defined jobs. Editors can focus on their favorite kind of copy. It's perfectly acceptable for a site to post 20 articles in a day. It's fine to post five stories. There's no convention.

Staffs can be lean. Advertisers know what kind of readers they're reaching. Experts in the field can engage with each other on message boards and write op-eds.

There's certainly still room for smart journalism at jack-of-all-trades publications. But as the media come to grips with an increasingly fragmented audience, it makes sense for journalists who are passionate about a topic to coalesce. Of course, there have long been niche publications on everything from gardening to fantasy sports. But many haven't moved online in earnest -- and they certainly haven't embraced interaction with readers.

Vertical start-ups have done well covering higher education, health, sports. There's room for so much more.